Hacker News Reader

Comment by vmg12 | Hacker News Reader

That's a mischaracterization of his argument. His argument is that existing laws should be enforced against AI companies and that we don't need new regulations for this.

View on HN

He "argued" a lot of things over almost 2 hours and very few of his arguments felt particularly cogent nor did they inspire confidence. Neither did the fact that he allegedly doesn't know his own zip code or phone number.

> Neither did the fact that he allegedly doesn't know his own zip code or phone number.

I only know my own ZIP code and phone number because I have to take care of my daily life myself and those are things that are important to know.

The founder and CEO of Nvidia has no concern whatsoever about those trivial things.

It's perfectly reasonable to think less of an individual who is so sheltered that they are incapable of caring for themselves. Whether it's your mother or your maid doing your laundry and cooking your meals for you.

I don't think less of a CEO just because they have an EA that takes care of stuff like phone numbers and mailing addresses for them and their business.

I don't think less of a CEO that has an EA, but I do think less of a CEO who doesn't know his own phone number or ZIP code.

He’s a story teller. He tried on a new story and probably won’t try that one again! Haha

I’ve forgotten my zip code before. And my phone number. But I get the reaction.

I largely agree, but I think he's right about one thing: AI reducing the demand for junior developers is temporary, and a new crop of "AI native" juniors is going to turn that around. Software is almost certainly a Jevons good, and however much AI improves development efficiency, I think we're always going to want discerning humans managing it. Right now it's mostly seniors who have the skills to adapt and take advantage of what current AI is offering, but young people who learned the profession in the presence of AI will be well positioned to do the same.

It'll be interesting to see how it plays out. I agree with him that systems level thinking is a skill that will only get more valuable and he seems quick to dismiss low-level details. I think the best practitioners will be those that can handle both high-level and low-level thinking.

Jensen’s misdirection hit well. If you noticed what he said immediately before: he said AI risk is his responsibility, and that the public should enjoy his optimism.

Weirdly paternal and deeply unsettling. The American public is held hostage to fools like this who are brute forcing a failing AI rollout.

On the very narrow question of whether existing laws are sufficient to punish the kind of bad behavior that OpenAI has already done, is that really a legal consensus?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com